Sunday, January 5, 2014


Say you are a member of the Election Committee of your cooperative.

Will you allow/qualify these co-op officers who failed to complete their "compliance training" as of Dec. 31, 2013, to run again this coming March 2014 elections?

Co-op officers have a term of two (2) years before seeking re-election.   I recall my own understanding of the CDA Memo Circular on the subject.

Current co-op officers, at the time of effectivity of the rules on the required compliance training, need to complete the same within their two (2)-year term.

Otherwise, they will NOT be allowed to run for re-election in the subsequent co-op elections

Another CDA Memo Circular even required that this rule be incorporated in the election rules of all cooperatives sometime ago.  If you ask me, this disqualification rule should be part of a co-op's By-laws, by way of its amendment.  Maybe CDA should require this amendment and not just as part of election rules.

In our co-op, the election period starts with the filing of application for candidacy sometime in October. Just for the filing of this application alone, there is a strict deadline set for the filing of requirements, including a copy of the medical certificate of the candidate

Then, these applicants are further screened and pre-qualified against a number of qualifications and disqualifications based on our co-op's By-laws and election rules. 

For example, there are defined cut-off dates on the determination of whether a candidate is delinquent or not in his current loan; whether he is a member in good standing (now member eligible to vote).

It is funny that our co-op's Election Committee had hastily ruled on the candidacy-eligibility of these re-electionist officer who had deficiencies in the training requirements, as of Dec. 31, 2013.  There are at least three (3) such members of our Board of Directors who each has one training still not complied with.

The Election Committee allowed these "training-deficient" officers to run again, provided that they will complete the training/seminar the day before the election in March 2014.

Failing this, their names will be taken down from the official list of candidates, immediately before or during election day.

Since our co-op has common cut-off date for all candidates to comply with election qualifications, which was November, it appears ridiculous and whimsical that these three "training-deficient" officers should be given "special treatment" and apparently will be exempted from the November deadline for all other candidates.

This seems unfair to other candidates who have to strictly abide by the November cut-off date, as officially and traditionally followed by our co-op all these past 43 years.

By this logic of our co-op's Election Committee, why not also reset the deadline for all the candidacy requirements and qualifications up to the day before the elections?

Our co-op's elections are still on the thirds week of March 2014.  There is time enough for those candidates unfairly affected to complain or protest.

There is time enough for our co-op's Board of Directors/management  to write and seek clarification/ruling/opinion  from the local CDA office (who, for 2014 vows in its work program to respond to such requests in 3 days).

There is still time for our co-op's Election Committee to set things right, if only to show that these three "training-deficient" officers are not getting special treatment.  And at least to avoid setting a bad and untenable precedent, which is not only unreasonable as it is inconvenient.

Does this happen or apply also to cases in your co-op?  What can you say?  (END).

No comments:

Related Posts with Thumbnails